oal part of LWJGL and joal

[vrm]

correct me if I'm wrong  

jogl & lwjgl are totaly differents (way handling windowing etc..)

but the OAL part joal ? is any good to maintain 2 differents API ?

[Jeff]

Hmm. Im not sure LWJGl and JOGL are all that different either.

JOAL is designed to be consistant with JOGL in how its organised.

Again, I'd say use what works for you, provide feedback to anyone you can for improvements, and let it work itself out over time.

JK

[vrm]

my main problems with JOGL are :

- dependency with awt/swing
- video mode changing with swing on linux  doens't work
- tried to hide mouse cursor with awt ?
- gl.glBlabla syntax
- all those array paremeters in place of directBuffer make me sucious on performance side

I feel back to old gl4java days.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[Jeff]

Make sure you post your issues to the JOGL thread, if you will.

On performance I *think* JOGL is about as good as any other well written OGL binding, but you could always write some benchmarks to learn more.

[princec]

There won't be anything in it for performance I shouldn't think.

Cas

[elias]

And gl.glBlah is around the corner for lwjgl too :-)

- elias

[Matzon]

but we have static classes - with static import, we're all good  

[vrm]

where is static import actualy in Java?
ho it's for later .. *grins*

[abies]

- tried to hide mouse cursor with awt ?

Yes, I have tried, it works, 2-3 lines of code.

[princec]

Daft code though innit?

Cas

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[Mojomonkey]

tried to hide mouse cursor with awt ?

Set your mouse cursor image to an empty image. This worked for me in my GL4Java days.

[kevglass]

I think thats what Cas was getting at? Its a bit daft, setting the mouse cursor to an empty image (not that its ever caused me any problems)

Kev

[Mojomonkey]

Ok, I'll bite. What exactly is "daft" about it?

[kevglass]

I suppose the nature of making something invisible when you actually want to turn it off. The operating system is still "drawing" the cursor, but actually its not cause its blank.

That, I would think, could be considered daft...

Not to say I don't use it  

Kev

[Mojomonkey]

Ok, but are you sure you'd ever want to turn the cursor off? You need to still need mouse movements, position, etc. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean you want it off.

[kevglass]

Well, I suppose it depends on how you're reading input again. I don't know input stuff very well, but I assume on most platforms the display of the cursor is seperate from reading the actual move.

Not to mention, in some games, you don't need mouse input at all.

Kev

[Mojomonkey]

That's a good point.. what input are we talking about here? Java Listeners or JNI to libraries (DirectInput)?

[kevglass]

I only guessing here, but since LWJGL isn't bound to AWT in any way, it can't be Java Listeners. They must have input libraries of some sort (either bound to DirectInput, or something equally as hacky - [read troll for Cas or Matzon])?

Anyone who actually knows this stuff want to comment?

Kev

[vrm]

lot of games hide the mouse cursor , ex : flight simulation
or for display a fancy opengl rendered animated cursor.

Yes setting the mouse icon to empty is an ugly workaround

[Mojomonkey]

I only guessing here, but since LWJGL isn't bound to AWT in any way, it can't be Java Listeners.

But I thought we were talking about JOGL?? Ok, I've lost track of this train of thought.  

I agree, if it's using JNI to communicate with the cursor that setting the image to an empty is an ugly work around. But if you are using a pure Java mouse listener interface (is this what JOGL (or JInput?) uses?) it's pretty much your only option and therefore not daft at all.

I think Cas was just being a troll making that comment anyways. So I'll stop biting at it.

[elias]

Set the cursor image to empty is not a work around at all. In fact, on linux, that's the only way of 'hiding' the cursor.

- elias

[nickdotjava]

And gl.glBlah is around the corner for lwjgl too :-)

- elias

Please, no.  This is one type of redundancy that is not needed.  Why add 2 extra letters to every GL command?

[Matzon]

Why add 2 extra letters to every GL command?

Because with static import in 1.5, you can just do:
glBlah

thus 95% of all your c code has readily usable! - only the Buffer stuff has to be handled.

[vrm]

perhaps we can wait 1.5 beta first ?  

[oNyx]

Set the cursor image to empty is not a work around at all. In fact, on linux, that's the only way of 'hiding' the cursor.

- elias

There should be a shorthandle anyways imo.

This *line* is just painfull and doesnt look that logical at all:
setCursor(Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().createCustomCursor(new BufferedImage(1,1,BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_ARGB),new Point(0,0),""));

Summin like this would be better:
setCursor(Cursor.getPredefinedCursor(Cursor.NO_CURSOR));

I always wondered why there isn't a "no draw" cursor and the NO_CURSOR was one of the things I just tried before I checked my books.

[Jeff]

So I may have lost the thread of logic too...

But JInput uses DirectInput on Win32.  You don't even need a Frame to use it (it has its own secret, invisible message pump.)

JK

[Captain-Goatse]

Because with static import in 1.5, you can just do:
glBlah

thus 95% of all your c code has readily usable! - only the Buffer stuff has to be handled.

So yeah like going from Java to C.... sounds like all I ever wanted. Oh shit, the mid form of these two already exists, C++4life, maaaaan.

[nickdotjava]

So yeah like going from Java to C.... sounds like all I ever wanted. Oh shit, the mid form of these two already exists, C++4life, maaaaan.

I started in C++, moved to Java, and have never looked back.  

[kevglass]

Horse for courses, if I wanted to write the next best selling first person shooter I guess I'd go for C++.

Kev

[princec]

I'm pretty confident of being able to do it in Java.
And sooner

Cas